News   Mar 28, 2024
 22     0 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 262     1 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 636     0 

Comparing transportation in NYC to Toronto

rfid

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Just wanted to get some opinion about running Toronto more like New York City. I have driven on New York area roads and taken the NYC subway and I made some observations.

The roads seem to flow fairly well in NYC. Drivers are, let me say, "assertive". They use their horn appropriately and drive decisively. There are lanes for buses, emergency vehicles marked on the road. Every other avenue or street seems to alternate between one way direction and the other way. Some roads are double-decked. I was wondering what the advantages or reason for this is as I've never seen that done here, other than minimally along the Gardiner with Lake Shore underneath. What if you added more lanes on top of an existing roadway (perhaps like if the 401 express lanes were on top of rather than beside each other)?

As for the subway, the system is vast and works. It's not the nicest looking thing, but it gets you where you need to go. The trains are less frequent as interlining is pretty much standard. By that, I mean subway lines are just infrastructure and routes run on various lines. So for instance, all of the N, R, and Q "routes" use either of the Broadway line's express or local tracks, but diverge to either Astoria or Queens Blvd. lines at the north end of the route.

If Toronto took a more incremental approach to building subway infrastructure, aka the few kms/year method discussed many times, it could perhaps offer a manageable way to expand the network. So for instance, Yonge, University, and Bloor-Danforth are the trunk lines. Off Yonge, you have the Sheppard line slowly adding to the network. Rather than appearing to be a stub (much like a short line like Astoria), it is a route that continues off the Yonge line. So, a route 4 train could use both the inftrastructure of the Yonge and Sheppard lines. I guess one reason against this is that Sheppard was never intended to be a stub.

One opinion I am looking for is whether express tracks are and should they be considered for new lines such as Eglinton?

Funny how Toronto was once referred to as New York City run by the Swiss. It seems like they took a lesson and are advancing and now it is Toronto's turn to look at how they run things to see what we can learn as we grow into what I hope will be the best metropolitan area on Earth!
 
One thing I notice when I look at other cities is that almost all lines go through the core. Rarely are there crosstown routes and when there are they are often remnants of frieght lines or earlier routes originating downtown. London has none, New York has one plus a couple of tiny shuttles, Paris has one circle route, Tokyo has one circle route and one crosstown... and these cities have vast and expansive networks. The only cities with suburban subway routes tend to be ones with downtown already filled with subway routes. Suburban routes are usually left to commuter agencies running in regular rail corridors (e.g. GO, S-Bahn, JR, Overground, RER, etc).
 
Also Toronto insists on creating new lines under specific streets and if they don't have enough ridership on them then not bother to build them. There aren't really any random spiraling out lines that would have stations further apart and stop only at major intersections.
 
Also Toronto insists on creating new lines under specific streets and if they don't have enough ridership on them then not bother to build them. There aren't really any random spiraling out lines that would have stations further apart and stop only at major intersections.

Its kind of for the sakes of simplicity especially to the new people. Take a person that never knew the New York subway system and give the person a map and tell the person to go from station A to station F and one would get confused by lines such as the L 3 7 E lines as opposed to the Sheppard, Bloor-Danforth and Sheppard. Yes there can be redunancy in street names but its not too common or the other street is too minor to even be heard of unless you live in the neighbourhood. Also, it could give out some sort of uniformality of the TTC sticking to mostly straight routes (except King-Union-St. Andrew part). But then again im comparing an over 100 year old subway system to a system going to be 57
 
Toronto just doesn't have the total population, let alone the population density, to support anything close to what New York has. Queens, Brooklyn and Bronx+Manhattan each have about the same population as the city of Toronto and occupy significantly less land when Staten Island is excluded. In other words, take the population of 416 Toronto, cram it all into a smaller area by removing the area of Scarborough, multiply the population by 3, and now you've got New York, not even including the suburbs!

Toronto certainly can support at most 2 new subway lines right now - Eglinton and DRL. Express tracks would be wonderful as the ride from Union to Bloor is dreadfully slow (compared to a New York express train), but I just don't see the need. We need to provide subway service to new areas before even considering express tracks.

On the roads side, they definitely do things better than us. Toronto should make all streets downtown one way and coordinate signals. Where they do this in New York, the effect is continuously moving traffic at about 40 km/hr - much better for pedestrians than Toronto where cars gun it and travel over 60 km/hr, only to slam on the breaks at intersections. For pedestrians, it's much easier jay walking across 1 way streets than 2 way streets.

There is one New York idea which I think Toronto should definitely adopt. I would like for our subway platforms to not only be marked by direction (ie southbound trains), but also by the ultimate destination. For example, at Eglinton Station on the Yonge line, you should be directed toward "downtown trains" and "North York" trains. Tourists as well as an alarming number of Torontonians are clueless as to how the street grid correlates to a compass, but do typically know what their final destination is.

Another New York concept which I like is allowing 2 or more stations to have the same name if they cross the same street. I think that each of the Bloor, Eglinton, and Sheppard lines should one day all have a Bathurst Station. To me, this is FAR preferable to having a Forest Hill station on Eglinton, and an Earl Bales station on Sheppard.

Lastly, the PRESTO card should be fully flexible, as the fare system is in New York. There, your monthly pass is valid for any 30 day period, and your weekly pass is valid for any 7 day period. Some friends who will be visiting Toronto in a few weeks will end up paying more than necessary because their 4 day visit spans 2 weeks, as defined by the TTC. As of yet, PRESTO is showing no signs of fixing this problem.
 
On the roads side, they definitely do things better than us. Toronto should make all streets downtown one way and coordinate signals. Where they do this in New York, the effect is continuously moving traffic at about 40 km/hr - much better for pedestrians than Toronto where cars gun it and travel over 60 km/hr, only to slam on the breaks at intersections. For pedestrians, it's much easier jay walking across 1 way streets than 2 way streets.

Why all streets? I never rode the bus in New York, but it seems if all streets were one way downtown it would make taking the bus or streetcar less convenient. Unless I'm not imagining the same thing you are.

There is one New York idea which I think Toronto should definitely adopt. I would like for our subway platforms to not only be marked by direction (ie southbound trains), but also by the ultimate destination. For example, at Eglinton Station on the Yonge line, you should be directed toward "downtown trains" and "North York" trains. Tourists as well as an alarming number of Torontonians are clueless as to how the street grid correlates to a compass, but do typically know what their final destination is.

We have this already. Signs say "Southbound to Union" or "Northbound to Finch" for example. They also say what the next station coming up is.
 
Newly built lines that relieves the current network and further reaching service should be the way to go, and those conditions would ensure that the newly built lines are busy enough to warrant their construction.

Interlining the system can cause confusion but they could at least have the lines split off at the end in some cases for even more coverage, such as a BD line splitting at Main Street and continue eastward on Danforth and up Kingston Road. Having trains run at half the frequency in the split ends is better than one end with the same number of trains.
 
I think the prime candidate for an interlined 4-track line is Queen St, but as an LRT, not a subway. Here's my reasoning:

The express tracks can run from Dundas West Stn via Roncesvalles and Queen to downtown, where they continue east along Queen to the CN tracks. Once there, they follow the CN tracks and terminate at Victoria Park station. Ideally there would only be a couple stations on that last stretch. The local tracks would carry the current 501 route. This would allow the local nature of Queen St to remain, while still providing rapid service in the form of a DRL West. This plan would not remove the need for the DRL East subway via Wellington or Front. I have to say I agree with Steve Munro with the fact that the DRL East and West don't necessarily have to be connected.

The advantage with doing 4-track LRT over 4-track subway is that 4-track LRT can run in-median in the more suburban areas where they would have more of a collector role as opposed to a long-haul role. Naturally, the 501 would basically run in what was proposed as the WWLRT from Roncesvalles to Long Branch. I also envision the western express route continuing north via the Georgetown corridor, and splitting at Eglinton, with local routes continuing up Jane as in-median LRT, and the express route continuing west along Eglinton to the airport via the Richview corridor. As for stations, what I envision is the local stations being similar to what is at Queen's Quay (ie a relatively small, compact station), with only the express stations being larger. The express route and stations should be designed to carry 4 to 6-car LRT trains, whereas the local route should be limited to paired trains.

I think this approach would balance the needs of Queen St as a pedestrian-oriented corridor, with the needs of the city at-large, which needs Queen as a long-haul transit corridor.
 
Toronto just doesn't have the total population, let alone the population density, to support anything close to what New York has. Queens, Brooklyn and Bronx+Manhattan each have about the same population as the city of Toronto and occupy significantly less land when Staten Island is excluded. In other words, take the population of 416 Toronto, cram it all into a smaller area by removing the area of Scarborough, multiply the population by 3, and now you've got New York, not even including the suburbs!

Toronto certainly can support at most 2 new subway lines right now - Eglinton and DRL. Express tracks would be wonderful as the ride from Union to Bloor is dreadfully slow (compared to a New York express train), but I just don't see the need. We need to provide subway service to new areas before even considering express tracks.

On the roads side, they definitely do things better than us. Toronto should make all streets downtown one way and coordinate signals. Where they do this in New York, the effect is continuously moving traffic at about 40 km/hr - much better for pedestrians than Toronto where cars gun it and travel over 60 km/hr, only to slam on the breaks at intersections. For pedestrians, it's much easier jay walking across 1 way streets than 2 way streets.

Seconded, good post. I would add that Toronto should have built some of its major lines with express and local stops for efficiency in service....if only we had the money right? However, doing this might actually relieve some of the pressure with tons of people on the same train during rush hour. It seems to in NY. Although I have also heard that the MTA has problems. Many trains don't run weekends, or late in to the evening, sometimes not at all for some periods. There are maybe 100 out of the 400 or so stations that look "decent", whereas TOronto stations look downright pretty in comparison. (due to age perhaps, 100 yrs, vs 50 at most here in TO.)
 
Interlining the system can cause confusion...

Interlining does not cause confusion. In Toronto, the majority of bus and streetcar routes are interlined for at least part of their route. If you've ever waited for a bus on Eglinton or a streetcar along Queen's Quay, you're almost certain to have waited at an interlined stop. Having said that though, the manner in which the TTC interlined its subway lines in the 1960s was atypical, confusing, and should never be repeated.

A hypothetical but not presently feasible subway interline would link the Yonge and Sheppard lines. Half the Yonge trains would continue northbound to Finch, and the other half would turn east onto Sheppard to Don Mills. I personally don't think this is confusing, but in order to be user friendly, it may be necessary to assign route numbers to the different subway routes - 1 trains travel between Finch and Downsview, while 2 trains travel between Don Mills and Downsview.
 
I don't think anyone is arguing that Toronto is as dense at NYC and that we can support that many subways.
 
How quickly we forget:

TorNYoverlay-BigDaddy.jpg


From What Happens If You Overlay Manhattan On Top Of Toronto? on urbantoronto back in September.

How many routes would Toronto have between Eglinton and the waterfront compared with New York City?
 
New York has a higher density, but it also has a much higher density of subway lines. Even if you build the Sheppard, Eglinton, Downtown Relief lines in their entirety, the density of subway lines in Toronto would not be anywhere close to that of New York City. So stop with the strawman arguments, please.
 

Back
Top